One way to solve this would be make corruption decrease over time but that timer ticks only when you're outside of a protection zone
A what zone?
I think that's the place at the airport where you can only park there while loading or unloading luggage and can't loiter to wait for someone. I may be wrong though.
That's actually incredible 😂
I guess I was wrong assuming you'll just get it from the context
What I meant by outside of a protecting zone is basically anywhere where you're vulnerable to being attacked such as outside of the city itself, while in it you're safe and cannot be attacked
Also, what if you had a node where the mayor doesn't put guards at the gates and basically turned this node to a corruption refuge
One way to solve this would be make corruption decrease over time but that timer ticks only when you're outside of a protection zone
A what zone?
I think that's the place at the airport where you can only park there while loading or unloading luggage and can't loiter to wait for someone. I may be wrong though.
That's actually incredible 😂
I guess I was wrong assuming you'll just get it from the context
What I meant by outside of a protecting zone is basically anywhere where you're vulnerable to being attacked such as outside of the city itself where you're safe and cannot be attacked
So, you mean player stalls?
Other than setting access permissions on your freehold, players that are selling stuff in market stalls are the only way that we know of right now where players can't be attacked.
0
Potato BasketMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
One way to solve this would be make corruption decrease over time but that timer ticks only when you're outside of a protection zone
A what zone?
I think that's the place at the airport where you can only park there while loading or unloading luggage and can't loiter to wait for someone. I may be wrong though.
That's actually incredible 😂
I guess I was wrong assuming you'll just get it from the context
What I meant by outside of a protecting zone is basically anywhere where you're vulnerable to being attacked such as outside of the city itself, where you're safe and cannot be attacked
So, you mean player stalls?
Other than setting access permissions on your freehold, players that are selling stuff in market stalls are the only way that we know of right now where players can't be attacked.
Wait so you're gonna be able to fight in the middle of the city too?
One way to solve this would be make corruption decrease over time but that timer ticks only when you're outside of a protection zone
A what zone?
I think that's the place at the airport where you can only park there while loading or unloading luggage and can't loiter to wait for someone. I may be wrong though.
That's actually incredible 😂
I guess I was wrong assuming you'll just get it from the context
What I meant by outside of a protecting zone is basically anywhere where you're vulnerable to being attacked such as outside of the city itself, where you're safe and cannot be attacked
So, you mean player stalls?
Other than setting access permissions on your freehold, players that are selling stuff in market stalls are the only way that we know of right now where players can't be attacked.
Wait so you're gonna be able to fight in the middle of the city too?
According to current info, though the guards will likely have something to say about that.
But the wording here also hints that he wants to gank/ initiate PvP first and then have an all-out brawl.
By all means tell me what part of my post actually suggest that.
It can't be an all out brawl more like a hunt since the bounty hunters won't attack each other (atleast, it's very unlikely), they'll all focus on the corrupted player (it's the goal of their bounty after all)
Idk how you guys turn a "no gear drop for 1/2 kills" into "He wants to gank one shot low lvl people and spawn camp them with a zerg of 451644151544ppl whose purpose in life is to make people quit the game"
I think a lot of you are wayyy too scared to get killed once in a while in open world and are over exaggerating everything I say on purpose to satisfy your paranoia.
Also, i'm of the idea that everyone who participated in a kill should get the corruption, no one likes zergs, especially when they try to abuse mechanics, the system doesn't have to be a copy paste of lineage2, there is always room for improvement.
Have you actually played with a system like this? If not why are you wanting to change stuff you have not even tested out? Surely there's room for improvement and why I do not like that low PK count wont make you drop gear is. You have a mob of 40. Thats 120 kills without gear drops or 80 where ever you set the limit. L2 actually has this in later expansions and it also has augments which makes it impossible to drop your weapon. These things again just scream for abuse of the system with bigger clans and alliances. It went to a point in where no one cared about PKs anymore because they never dropped anything.
Even if it is less than 3 or 5 in total you still have this "sin eater quest" that Steven mentioned where you can lower your total PK count. Which makes it so that you will never drop gear if you dont go to insane PK spree and you are smart about it.
Or then you dont have sin eater kinda system where a night of pking can set you to huge corruption levels in the future for just one kill because of high PK count which is nice and all but will end up in "Im gonna reroll cuz if i accidentally pk Someone it takes 3 hours to clear corruption".
Just seriously I have never had any problems with 1 PK dropping gear. At least in l2 the first times take just couple minutes to clear it so if you dont go ganking arouns its not such an issue. I feel you are trying to fix something you dont undestand.
Group PK status? So partying with randoms is never going to be option or the trolling would be every day happening. "2 random guys kill their dualboxes and make us all go PK, drop party and kill us all"
Have you actually played with a system like this? If not why are you wanting to change stuff you have not even tested out? Surely there's room for improvement and why I do not like that low PK count wont make you drop gear is. You have a mob of 40. Thats 120 kills without gear drops or 80 where ever you set the limit. L2 actually has this in later expansions and it also has augments which makes it impossible to drop your weapon. These things again just scream for abuse of the system with bigger clans and alliances. It went to a point in where no one cared about PKs anymore because they never dropped anything.
Group PK status? So partying with randoms is never going to be option or the trolling would be every day happening. "2 random guys kill their dualboxes and make us all go PK, drop party and kill us all"
Rather than me, I think it's your opinion that is completely biased from L2.
Who said group PK status? I said everyone who participated in the kill, if you're in group with someone but he decides to kill a random guy alone you didn't participate in the kill did you?
If a group of 5 decides to PK someone, but one of them disagree and doesn't do anything, then only the 4 who participated gets the corruption.
Again, this system doesn't have to work like L2, tbh L2's flagging system was kinda garbage with the number of ways you could abuse it. A good flagging system should prevent zergs from PKing, not prevent 1/2 isolated players from killing someone they don't like, which is exactly the opposite of L2's flagging system.
IMO a corrupted player should get flagged as an enemy to everyone (his group and other corrupted players included) and take aoe damage from everyone aside from non combatants, and be able to receive heals/buffs from no one besides himself.
Anything else would just go in favor of PK zergs instead of the "PK out of hate for someone" that it's supposed to be.
PK's should be people who hide and try to survive from their pursuers, not someone who can stand in a zerg in the middle of the road.
No, atm, if you are corrupted, non combatant players can attack you and you cannot fight back because if you do you will gain even more corruption.
Yeah this is flawed in my opinion, and a lot of people already agree with that. Also Steven knows this and it will be throughly tested in Alpha and Beta.
Aside from that im 100% against PvP servers or special kind of servers in general. This game is designed for PvX and will probably be the best system every designed for a mmorpg so there is no need for special servers.
No, atm, if you are corrupted, non combatant players can attack you and you cannot fight back because if you do you will gain even more corruption.
Yeah this is flawed in my opinion
By flawed, I assume you mean untrue.
If you are corrupted, you can fight back if you want. Sure, it means you will gain more corruption, but you have already proven that you are ok with corruption so why not just go all in?
I think its bad to split the fanbase like that. Simple as that. Even if difference was to be minimal, it would actively pull away people from normal servers, and actively scare off people off pvp servers depending on their mindset. And thats bad for the big picture majority because its a pvp game, if regular servers have mostly non pvp minded people, many systems stop working.
Instead what would be better would be turbo pvp non corruption u enter u flag zones, just open world battleground or two with zero actual benefit of being there other than some honor/title/ranking system.
If you are corrupted, you can fight back if you want. Sure, it means you will gain more corruption, but you have already proven that you are ok with corruption so why not just go all in?
Why don't they just increase the subscription price to 15$ an hour then? You already pay 15$ a month and you are ok with it, so why not just go all in?
See, this is the reason why 100% of your posts in this thread are complete bs, your reasoning is always full of obvious flaws that you try to hide behind a smartass attitude.
If you are corrupted, you can fight back if you want. Sure, it means you will gain more corruption, but you have already proven that you are ok with corruption so why not just go all in?
Why don't they just increase the subscription price to 15$ an hour then? You already pay 15$ a month and you are ok with it, so why not just go all in?
See, this is the reason why 100% of your posts in this thread are complete bs, your reasoning is always full of obvious flaws that you try to hide behind a smartass attitude.
Other way round - I hide the smartass attitude behind the obvious flaws.
No, atm, if you are corrupted, non combatant players can attack you and you cannot fight back because if you do you will gain even more corruption.
As it should be.
If you think this is normal that you cannot even fight back when someone attacks you then this is why the PvE community isn't fitting to any pvp/pvx activity and actively prevent good games from being very popular.
No matter the games, it's the pvx/pvp community who creates activities, make servers feel alive, create interactions between players, they are the unknown factor in a well known game, the thing that makes these worlds different each time you log in.
Oh and before you brand me as an evil PKer who does nothing but slaughter low level noobies all day, I need to say that I also disagree with this type of playstyle, and my suggestion would not benefit them in any way as these kind of players would still drop their gear after the 2nd kill they do in my suggestion.
0
AtamaMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
No, atm, if you are corrupted, non combatant players can attack you and you cannot fight back because if you do you will gain even more corruption.
As it should be.
If you think this is normal that you cannot even fight back when someone attacks you then this is why the PvE community isn't fitting to any pvp/pvx activity and actively prevent good games from being very popular.
No matter the games, it's the pvx/pvp community who creates activities, make servers feel alive, create interactions between players, they are the unknown factor in a well known game, the thing that makes these worlds different each time you log in.
Oh and before you brand me as an evil PKer who does nothing but slaughter low level noobies all day, I need to say that I also disagree with this type of playstyle, and my suggestion would not benefit them in any way as these kind of players would still drop their gear after the 2nd kill they do in my suggestion.
This game is a compromise. It will be practically impossible to avoid all PvP. This is not a PvE paradise. But it’s also not a 100% free-for-all PvP environment either. There are consequences for some kinds of PvP.
You don’t come across as a bloodthirsty PK ganker looking to grief people (and we’ve had those people on these boards before). You just want to shift that compromise a bit, basically let the first attack on a player who doesn’t or can’t fight back be a mulligan. The developers disagree with that and most of the community does too so that’s unlikely to happen.
Have you actually played with a system like this? If not why are you wanting to change stuff you have not even tested out? Surely there's room for improvement and why I do not like that low PK count wont make you drop gear is. You have a mob of 40. Thats 120 kills without gear drops or 80 where ever you set the limit. L2 actually has this in later expansions and it also has augments which makes it impossible to drop your weapon. These things again just scream for abuse of the system with bigger clans and alliances. It went to a point in where no one cared about PKs anymore because they never dropped anything.
Group PK status? So partying with randoms is never going to be option or the trolling would be every day happening. "2 random guys kill their dualboxes and make us all go PK, drop party and kill us all"
Rather than me, I think it's your opinion that is completely biased from L2.
Who said group PK status? I said everyone who participated in the kill, if you're in group with someone but he decides to kill a random guy alone you didn't participate in the kill did you?
If a group of 5 decides to PK someone, but one of them disagree and doesn't do anything, then only the 4 who participated gets the corruption.
Again, this system doesn't have to work like L2, tbh L2's flagging system was kinda garbage with the number of ways you could abuse it. A good flagging system should prevent zergs from PKing, not prevent 1/2 isolated players from killing someone they don't like, which is exactly the opposite of L2's flagging system.
IMO a corrupted player should get flagged as an enemy to everyone (his group and other corrupted players included) and take aoe damage from everyone aside from non combatants, and be able to receive heals/buffs from no one besides himself.
Anything else would just go in favor of PK zergs instead of the "PK out of hate for someone" that it's supposed to be.
PK's should be people who hide and try to survive from their pursuers, not someone who can stand in a zerg in the middle of the road.
So is healing participation in the kill? Is buffing participating in the kill? Or do you just count a person that hits? Because still it can and will be abused to no end. You have given 0 examples how it's carbage other than saying you want no risk PK for low amount of kills. It's not just "PK out of hate" that is one of the reasons you can do it. "It can be abused" just how? How do you abuse the system?
PK's should be people who hide and try to survive from their pursuers, not someone who can stand in a zerg in the middle of the road.
That's your opinion but then again I think it's ment for both. And currently it seems to work for both. I have killed people numerous times when they have annoyed me and then just went hiding and clearing 'corruption'.
Again it works but you seem to imagine it doesn't. Not much else to say on this subject.
cant wait for the non pvp griefer, cant wait for you to ENJOY it. Lets see how happy your pve gameplay will be then. In case people basically are forced not to kill someone they will just follow the guy and hit all the mobs hes gonna try to hit if he has more dmg it will be no problem to destroy his gameplay until he stops.
Yes it does. You will be flagged Corrupted when you kill a Non-Combatant. The penalties after one kill are minor besides the increased death penalties. It is the player who PK and grief consistently that will be heavily hit by penalties.
You won't lose gear after 1 kill unless that breaks the threshold of corruption that turns on the ability to lose an item. If you're level 50 and you kill a lvl 10 non-combatant. Yeah, that'll most likely get you to the threshold. If you kill another lvl 50 non-combatant (maybe they're afk) then you won't break that threshold. It might take another kill or two but Steven said there's a threshold for when dropping gear kicks in.
Yes it does. You will be flagged Corrupted when you kill a Non-Combatant. The penalties after one kill are minor besides the increased death penalties. It is the player who PK and grief consistently that will be heavily hit by penalties.
You won't lose gear after 1 kill unless that breaks the threshold of corruption that turns on the ability to lose an item. If you're level 50 and you kill a lvl 10 non-combatant. Yeah, that'll most likely get you to the threshold. If you kill another lvl 50 non-combatant (maybe they're afk) then you won't break that threshold. It might take another kill or two but Steven said there's a threshold for when dropping gear kicks in.
That's good news, mind sending me a link of where he said that please?
Also, did he mention by any chance if this threshold is shown somewhere ingame?
Yes it does. You will be flagged Corrupted when you kill a Non-Combatant. The penalties after one kill are minor besides the increased death penalties. It is the player who PK and grief consistently that will be heavily hit by penalties.
You won't lose gear after 1 kill unless that breaks the threshold of corruption that turns on the ability to lose an item. If you're level 50 and you kill a lvl 10 non-combatant. Yeah, that'll most likely get you to the threshold. If you kill another lvl 50 non-combatant (maybe they're afk) then you won't break that threshold. It might take another kill or two but Steven said there's a threshold for when dropping gear kicks in.
That's good news, mind sending me a link of where he said that please?
Also, did he mention by any chance if this threshold is shown somewhere?
No mention of the threshold. But he says, " If you die while corrupt, based on what your corruption score is, a chance to drop equipped items or gear".
Yes it does. You will be flagged Corrupted when you kill a Non-Combatant. The penalties after one kill are minor besides the increased death penalties. It is the player who PK and grief consistently that will be heavily hit by penalties.
You won't lose gear after 1 kill unless that breaks the threshold of corruption that turns on the ability to lose an item. If you're level 50 and you kill a lvl 10 non-combatant. Yeah, that'll most likely get you to the threshold. If you kill another lvl 50 non-combatant (maybe they're afk) then you won't break that threshold. It might take another kill or two but Steven said there's a threshold for when dropping gear kicks in.
That's good news, mind sending me a link of where he said that please?
Also, did he mention by any chance if this threshold is shown somewhere?
No mention of the threshold. But he says, " If you die while corrupt, based on what your corruption score is, a chance to drop equipped items or gear".
That's very confusing, "you have a chance, based on your corruption score, to drop gear" can also simply mean that the chance increases as your corruption score increases, it doesn't necessarily means that there is a threshold to reach in order to have a small % to drop gear.
And this interview is 3 years old, things might have changed since then, the game was still really early in the development back in 2017.
Corruption based pvp won't even exist with the current ruleset. No one will ever take the risk of losing their gear, no matter how small the chance is, once their characters are starting to be geared.
The chance of losing gear doesn't kick in after one kill, you need several.
It does kick in after one kill. Granted, the probabillity is low, but i'd never want to gamble my gear that I finally acquired after months of tryhard over a single kill, and I doubt anyone would want to gamble it either.
Ultima Online has a simple blue and red system and in that game your gear is on the floor when you die and they had/have a thriving active pvp scene. It sucks losing your gear but it's balanced by having gear somewhat normalized, there are few legendary rare op items and more so just good quality, better quality and best quality with some random stat effects that add flavor. You do have the ability to bless gear that makes them bound to you, so that helps.
I remember being a very good boy back in old school Ultima and then after their biggest update/expansion I made a dragon tamer pk character and fell in love with the epic battles us reds had vs blues hiding behind town guards. It really made for some great fun, and part of the fun was the fear of possibly dying and losing your stuff. The worst part was losing a dragon that wasn't bonded yet. Either way AoC has a pretty fair system for pvp and if you are more inclined to be an open world pvper then the caravan system and monster coins should strike your fancy. I personally want to see more scenarios that pit human vs human, because player vs ai gets boring once everything is figured out and becomes a simple spell rotation with some programmed movement.
But to touch on your main message... if someone really irks you and goes out of their way to annoy you and push your buttons and you just have to kill them to show them that they aren't all badass then yes the current system does punish you if that player decides to sit and let you get corrupted because they either don't want to fight you for fear of being beaten fairly or because they are trolling you and want you to get corrupted and lose your stuff eventually. I do understand the system and I respect it but if I am allowed to be brutally honest it does seem to lean towards the larger group of players who care nothing for a more tweaked open pvp system. There are other games more heavily focused on pvp, but if you want to enjoy this one then you gotta get behind its mechanics and be overly active in what is allowed.
Wouldn't it just be much simpler to make an alt of the same class, equip it with relatively decent gear (not your main's), and be permanently corrupt to fight players? Sure it'll take like another month+ of grinding an alt but at least it far less intrusive than messing with the entire corruption system of which hasn't been fully revealed or tested.
it's still fine to theorize how the current system can be worked out, but there isn't enough information for such conclusive answers or drastic changes.
The sad part is there are so few willing to just talk about potential ideas, they just want to keep repeating the same "this is fact and you are wrong because we don't like it"
On my thread about being a bad guy we have had some good suggestions come up and I keep trying to get some feedback on the internal religion systems possibly leading to some kind of secondary faction war that lets you be perma flagged to an enemy religion so you can openly fight then at all times.
There are some of us that enjoy creative thinking and the best part is that this game is NOT FINISHED and even if Steven himself says something won't happen, then it is just for now. We have many years to come after this game launches and the community finds and fills all the little cracks and starts asking for more and then new systems and rules will evolve and who knows... maybe there will be some new pvp systems, maybe not, but nobody knows until it happens or doesn't.
Ultima Online has a simple blue and red system and in that game your gear is on the floor when you die and they had/have a thriving active pvp scene.
Well as I said, if the whole game revolves around full loot, then it is not a problem, because it's highly unlikely that you can drop gear that you"d spend months to farm.
As you said yourself, the rarest items you can bind them to your character, and the rest is probably very easy to replace.
The sad part is there are so few willing to just talk about potential ideas, they just want to keep repeating the same "this is fact and you are wrong because we don't like it"
Yeah, I kinda noticed, the moment you mention pvp, some people seems to have PTSD from the previous games they played
I think having PvP and PvE tags on the servers would be fine. In other MMORPGs people usually find guilds prior to launch and a PvP server is usually designated. This would make it easier for people that don't find a guild or checking the forums in the know. Doesn't even have to have rule changes or anything and doesn't even have to last forever. Even if it's a temporary tag I think it'd be good overall for the community.
Yeah, I kinda noticed, the moment you mention pvp, some people seems to have PTSD from the previous games they played
Sadly the same people saying things like "you clearly don't understand terms and etc" they stop at pvp and assume it means griefing. Player vs Player is a broad term and there are so many things involved in player vs player. This game has several systems that directly center around player vs player and all we want to do is talk about other systems.
If you think this is normal that you cannot even fight back when someone attacks you
Again, you can fight back just fine.
When you attack someone and gain corruption for the first time, you made a choice to gain that corruption.
If a non-combatant then comes up to you and attacks you, that isn't you not having a choice at all, that is a consequence of the choice you have already made.
You made the decision to gain corruption, and that player being able to attack you without themself gaining corruption is a consequence of that decision.
Don't like the consequence? Make the first decision differently.
Yeah, I kinda noticed, the moment you mention pvp, some people seems to have PTSD from the previous games they played
Sadly the same people saying things like "you clearly don't understand terms and etc" they stop at pvp and assume it means griefing. Player vs Player is a broad term and there are so many things involved in player vs player. This game has several systems that directly center around player vs player and all we want to do is talk about other systems.
It's been made entirely clear that Corruption is purely a punishment. You can stop trying to make it into something that has any appeal because that goes directly against its existence.
There are plenty of PvP options for you. Ganking without punishment and fighting over things with insignificant value are not options Intrepid wants to encourage. Guild wars are corruption-free. Caravans are corruption-free. Node wars are corruption-free. Sieges are corruption-free. Bounty hunter gameplay is corruption-free. Arena PvP is corruption-free.
Fighting for control of a dungeon is low-risk. Fighting over valuable rare material is very low-risk
The idea of someone repeatedly coming back to "get revenge" makes no sense in a game with randomized resource spawns and no fast travel.
Suggestions that Corruption shouldn't hurt your ability to continue engaging in unwanted PvP patterns are shortsighted and rooted in disingenuous motives.
Suggestions that Corruption shouldn't hurt your ability to continue engaging in unwanted PvP patterns are shortsighted and rooted in disingenuous motives.
You make no sense whatsoever.
What unwanted pvp pattern is there if a green attacks a red? He chose to attack, he should be ready to get some resistance.
You made the decision to gain corruption, and that player being able to attack you without themself gaining corruption is a consequence of that decision.
But no one is talking about the green guy gaining corruption. We're talking about the corrupted guy not having the possibility of self defense if attacked by a green else he'd worsen his corruption even more.
When you attack someone and gain corruption for the first time, you made a choice to gain that corruption.
If a non-combatant then comes up to you and attacks you, that isn't you not having a choice at all, that is a consequence of the choice you have already made.
Again a fallacious logic.
Stop pretending that all "non combatants"' are innocent and should be protected at all costs.
There are tons of reasons that would justify killing a non combatant.
What if someone with a better dps class than yours decide to ks all your mobs and follow you around just so you can't even farm anything? Is this guy worth overprotecting non combatants at all costs?
What if you're fighting a boss, and then a green stays around, wait till the last 10% when the boss will do huge dmg skills to use CC on your healer, resulting in your group wiping without him gaining any sort of corruption. You come back to the boss, just to see the same guy camping next to it, waiting for you to reach 10% to flag combatant and screw you over again. Why should you suffer from such a punitive system should you decide to get rid of the threat before it explodes on your face again?
CBA writing even more examples, but there is a lot of things you can do to grief someone without ever flagging red, and this corruption system will actually overprotect this kind of people because the penalties are THAT BAD that you wouldn't even want to kill the guy even if he r*ped your whole family.
But no one is talking about the green guy gaining corruption. We're talking about the corrupted guy not having the possibility of self defense if attacked by a green else he'd worsen his corruption even more.
It's not my fault you are trying to have the wrong conversation.
There is no situation at all in which the story begins with a player being corrupted - if that is where you are starting your narrative, you are purposefully ignoring the start of that story.
If you start your narrative at the actual start, then there is a completely different story to tell.
Edit; as to your two examples, in the first one, go and do something else, or kill him and take the consequences like an adult.
In the second one, we have no reason to assume this will be possible.
As to how the corruption system protects people - it does less of a job of protecting people that a PvE game does. I'm not saying that Ashes should be a PvE game (not at all), but in order for your argument here to make sense, we would have to see nothing but this kind of behavior in all non-PvP games.
Comments
That's actually incredible 😂
I guess I was wrong assuming you'll just get it from the context
What I meant by outside of a protecting zone is basically anywhere where you're vulnerable to being attacked such as outside of the city itself, while in it you're safe and cannot be attacked
Also, what if you had a node where the mayor doesn't put guards at the gates and basically turned this node to a corruption refuge
So, you mean player stalls?
Other than setting access permissions on your freehold, players that are selling stuff in market stalls are the only way that we know of right now where players can't be attacked.
Wait so you're gonna be able to fight in the middle of the city too?
According to current info, though the guards will likely have something to say about that.
Have you actually played with a system like this? If not why are you wanting to change stuff you have not even tested out? Surely there's room for improvement and why I do not like that low PK count wont make you drop gear is. You have a mob of 40. Thats 120 kills without gear drops or 80 where ever you set the limit. L2 actually has this in later expansions and it also has augments which makes it impossible to drop your weapon. These things again just scream for abuse of the system with bigger clans and alliances. It went to a point in where no one cared about PKs anymore because they never dropped anything.
Even if it is less than 3 or 5 in total you still have this "sin eater quest" that Steven mentioned where you can lower your total PK count. Which makes it so that you will never drop gear if you dont go to insane PK spree and you are smart about it.
Or then you dont have sin eater kinda system where a night of pking can set you to huge corruption levels in the future for just one kill because of high PK count which is nice and all but will end up in "Im gonna reroll cuz if i accidentally pk Someone it takes 3 hours to clear corruption".
Just seriously I have never had any problems with 1 PK dropping gear. At least in l2 the first times take just couple minutes to clear it so if you dont go ganking arouns its not such an issue. I feel you are trying to fix something you dont undestand.
Group PK status? So partying with randoms is never going to be option or the trolling would be every day happening. "2 random guys kill their dualboxes and make us all go PK, drop party and kill us all"
Who said group PK status? I said everyone who participated in the kill, if you're in group with someone but he decides to kill a random guy alone you didn't participate in the kill did you?
If a group of 5 decides to PK someone, but one of them disagree and doesn't do anything, then only the 4 who participated gets the corruption.
Again, this system doesn't have to work like L2, tbh L2's flagging system was kinda garbage with the number of ways you could abuse it. A good flagging system should prevent zergs from PKing, not prevent 1/2 isolated players from killing someone they don't like, which is exactly the opposite of L2's flagging system.
IMO a corrupted player should get flagged as an enemy to everyone (his group and other corrupted players included) and take aoe damage from everyone aside from non combatants, and be able to receive heals/buffs from no one besides himself.
Anything else would just go in favor of PK zergs instead of the "PK out of hate for someone" that it's supposed to be.
PK's should be people who hide and try to survive from their pursuers, not someone who can stand in a zerg in the middle of the road.
Yeah this is flawed in my opinion, and a lot of people already agree with that. Also Steven knows this and it will be throughly tested in Alpha and Beta.
Aside from that im 100% against PvP servers or special kind of servers in general. This game is designed for PvX and will probably be the best system every designed for a mmorpg so there is no need for special servers.
If you are corrupted, you can fight back if you want. Sure, it means you will gain more corruption, but you have already proven that you are ok with corruption so why not just go all in?
Instead what would be better would be turbo pvp non corruption u enter u flag zones, just open world battleground or two with zero actual benefit of being there other than some honor/title/ranking system.
See, this is the reason why 100% of your posts in this thread are complete bs, your reasoning is always full of obvious flaws that you try to hide behind a smartass attitude.
Other way round - I hide the smartass attitude behind the obvious flaws.
Doesn't change the outcome of this thread though.
As it should be.
If you think this is normal that you cannot even fight back when someone attacks you then this is why the PvE community isn't fitting to any pvp/pvx activity and actively prevent good games from being very popular.
No matter the games, it's the pvx/pvp community who creates activities, make servers feel alive, create interactions between players, they are the unknown factor in a well known game, the thing that makes these worlds different each time you log in.
Oh and before you brand me as an evil PKer who does nothing but slaughter low level noobies all day, I need to say that I also disagree with this type of playstyle, and my suggestion would not benefit them in any way as these kind of players would still drop their gear after the 2nd kill they do in my suggestion.
You don’t come across as a bloodthirsty PK ganker looking to grief people (and we’ve had those people on these boards before). You just want to shift that compromise a bit, basically let the first attack on a player who doesn’t or can’t fight back be a mulligan. The developers disagree with that and most of the community does too so that’s unlikely to happen.
So is healing participation in the kill? Is buffing participating in the kill? Or do you just count a person that hits? Because still it can and will be abused to no end. You have given 0 examples how it's carbage other than saying you want no risk PK for low amount of kills. It's not just "PK out of hate" that is one of the reasons you can do it. "It can be abused" just how? How do you abuse the system?
That's your opinion but then again I think it's ment for both. And currently it seems to work for both. I have killed people numerous times when they have annoyed me and then just went hiding and clearing 'corruption'.
Again it works but you seem to imagine it doesn't. Not much else to say on this subject.
You won't lose gear after 1 kill unless that breaks the threshold of corruption that turns on the ability to lose an item. If you're level 50 and you kill a lvl 10 non-combatant. Yeah, that'll most likely get you to the threshold. If you kill another lvl 50 non-combatant (maybe they're afk) then you won't break that threshold. It might take another kill or two but Steven said there's a threshold for when dropping gear kicks in.
That's good news, mind sending me a link of where he said that please?
Also, did he mention by any chance if this threshold is shown somewhere ingame?
No mention of the threshold. But he says, " If you die while corrupt, based on what your corruption score is, a chance to drop equipped items or gear".
Mentions at 3:30
That's very confusing, "you have a chance, based on your corruption score, to drop gear" can also simply mean that the chance increases as your corruption score increases, it doesn't necessarily means that there is a threshold to reach in order to have a small % to drop gear.
And this interview is 3 years old, things might have changed since then, the game was still really early in the development back in 2017.
Ultima Online has a simple blue and red system and in that game your gear is on the floor when you die and they had/have a thriving active pvp scene. It sucks losing your gear but it's balanced by having gear somewhat normalized, there are few legendary rare op items and more so just good quality, better quality and best quality with some random stat effects that add flavor. You do have the ability to bless gear that makes them bound to you, so that helps.
I remember being a very good boy back in old school Ultima and then after their biggest update/expansion I made a dragon tamer pk character and fell in love with the epic battles us reds had vs blues hiding behind town guards. It really made for some great fun, and part of the fun was the fear of possibly dying and losing your stuff. The worst part was losing a dragon that wasn't bonded yet. Either way AoC has a pretty fair system for pvp and if you are more inclined to be an open world pvper then the caravan system and monster coins should strike your fancy. I personally want to see more scenarios that pit human vs human, because player vs ai gets boring once everything is figured out and becomes a simple spell rotation with some programmed movement.
But to touch on your main message... if someone really irks you and goes out of their way to annoy you and push your buttons and you just have to kill them to show them that they aren't all badass then yes the current system does punish you if that player decides to sit and let you get corrupted because they either don't want to fight you for fear of being beaten fairly or because they are trolling you and want you to get corrupted and lose your stuff eventually. I do understand the system and I respect it but if I am allowed to be brutally honest it does seem to lean towards the larger group of players who care nothing for a more tweaked open pvp system. There are other games more heavily focused on pvp, but if you want to enjoy this one then you gotta get behind its mechanics and be overly active in what is allowed.
The sad part is there are so few willing to just talk about potential ideas, they just want to keep repeating the same "this is fact and you are wrong because we don't like it"
On my thread about being a bad guy we have had some good suggestions come up and I keep trying to get some feedback on the internal religion systems possibly leading to some kind of secondary faction war that lets you be perma flagged to an enemy religion so you can openly fight then at all times.
There are some of us that enjoy creative thinking and the best part is that this game is NOT FINISHED and even if Steven himself says something won't happen, then it is just for now. We have many years to come after this game launches and the community finds and fills all the little cracks and starts asking for more and then new systems and rules will evolve and who knows... maybe there will be some new pvp systems, maybe not, but nobody knows until it happens or doesn't.
Well as I said, if the whole game revolves around full loot, then it is not a problem, because it's highly unlikely that you can drop gear that you"d spend months to farm.
As you said yourself, the rarest items you can bind them to your character, and the rest is probably very easy to replace.
Yeah, I kinda noticed, the moment you mention pvp, some people seems to have PTSD from the previous games they played
Sadly the same people saying things like "you clearly don't understand terms and etc" they stop at pvp and assume it means griefing. Player vs Player is a broad term and there are so many things involved in player vs player. This game has several systems that directly center around player vs player and all we want to do is talk about other systems.
When you attack someone and gain corruption for the first time, you made a choice to gain that corruption.
If a non-combatant then comes up to you and attacks you, that isn't you not having a choice at all, that is a consequence of the choice you have already made.
You made the decision to gain corruption, and that player being able to attack you without themself gaining corruption is a consequence of that decision.
Don't like the consequence? Make the first decision differently.
It's been made entirely clear that Corruption is purely a punishment. You can stop trying to make it into something that has any appeal because that goes directly against its existence.
There are plenty of PvP options for you. Ganking without punishment and fighting over things with insignificant value are not options Intrepid wants to encourage. Guild wars are corruption-free. Caravans are corruption-free. Node wars are corruption-free. Sieges are corruption-free. Bounty hunter gameplay is corruption-free. Arena PvP is corruption-free.
Fighting for control of a dungeon is low-risk. Fighting over valuable rare material is very low-risk
The idea of someone repeatedly coming back to "get revenge" makes no sense in a game with randomized resource spawns and no fast travel.
Suggestions that Corruption shouldn't hurt your ability to continue engaging in unwanted PvP patterns are shortsighted and rooted in disingenuous motives.
You make no sense whatsoever.
What unwanted pvp pattern is there if a green attacks a red? He chose to attack, he should be ready to get some resistance.
But no one is talking about the green guy gaining corruption. We're talking about the corrupted guy not having the possibility of self defense if attacked by a green else he'd worsen his corruption even more.
Again a fallacious logic.
Stop pretending that all "non combatants"' are innocent and should be protected at all costs.
There are tons of reasons that would justify killing a non combatant.
What if someone with a better dps class than yours decide to ks all your mobs and follow you around just so you can't even farm anything? Is this guy worth overprotecting non combatants at all costs?
What if you're fighting a boss, and then a green stays around, wait till the last 10% when the boss will do huge dmg skills to use CC on your healer, resulting in your group wiping without him gaining any sort of corruption. You come back to the boss, just to see the same guy camping next to it, waiting for you to reach 10% to flag combatant and screw you over again. Why should you suffer from such a punitive system should you decide to get rid of the threat before it explodes on your face again?
CBA writing even more examples, but there is a lot of things you can do to grief someone without ever flagging red, and this corruption system will actually overprotect this kind of people because the penalties are THAT BAD that you wouldn't even want to kill the guy even if he r*ped your whole family.
There is no situation at all in which the story begins with a player being corrupted - if that is where you are starting your narrative, you are purposefully ignoring the start of that story.
If you start your narrative at the actual start, then there is a completely different story to tell.
Edit; as to your two examples, in the first one, go and do something else, or kill him and take the consequences like an adult.
In the second one, we have no reason to assume this will be possible.
As to how the corruption system protects people - it does less of a job of protecting people that a PvE game does. I'm not saying that Ashes should be a PvE game (not at all), but in order for your argument here to make sense, we would have to see nothing but this kind of behavior in all non-PvP games.